DISCLAIMER: THE POSTING OF STORIES, COMMENTARIES, REPORTS, DOCUMENTS AND LINKS (EMBEDDED OR OTHERWISE) ON THIS SITE DOES NOT IN ANY WAY, SHAPE OR FORM, IMPLIED OR OTHERWISE, NECESSARILY EXPRESS OR SUGGEST ENDORSEMENT OR SUPPORT OF ANY OF SUCH POSTED MATERIAL OR PARTS THEREIN.

Pages

Wednesday, 12 August 2015

In an attempt to undo some damage possibly caused by discredited, and disgraced, ITV/CTV (Jersey's ITV franchise) we publish an e-mail below sent from VFC to the Jersey Child Abuse Inquiry.

It is inaccurate (and burying of) stories from the State Media that allowed the Jersey Child Abuse cover-up to continue and it looks like ITV/CTV wishes to carry on its time honoured tradition of, at best, sloppy "journalism" and at worst down-right lies in order to frighten victims/witnesses from coming forward to the Committee of Inquiry to give evidence.

The e-mail (below) was sent on Friday 6 August 2015.

"Dear Inquiry Team.

I'd like to bring to your attention yet more inaccurate reporting and sloppy "journalism" from the discredited and disgraced ITV/CTV.

On its 6 o'clock alleged "news" programme yesterday (Friday 7 August 2015) it reported on the testimony of Morag and Tony Jordan. Twice during the report it was stated that the Jordan's were "cross-examined" By Patrick Saad.

I (unaccredited) (and just about anybody with the slightest interest in your Inquiry) am aware that there is NO "cross-examination" of witnesses and to the credit of the Inquiry it has gone to great lengths to stress this fact. Indeed from the very outset of the Inquiry on April 3rd 2014 Judge Oldham QC, at her opening address, at which (I believe) ITV/CTV was present she stated;

"This is an inquiry: no individual or institution is on trial. This does not mean that the Inquiry will avoid making criticisms, but it does mean that there are no parties and no sides; no scoring of points. Every witness will have a valuable perspective. There will be no cross-examination of witnesses."

Judge Oldham went on to reiterate the point that there will be NO cross examination of witnesses in her opening address here;

"I turn now to legal representation. I repeat this is an Inquiry, not a trial. You do not need a lawyer to provide your evidence to the Inquiry. The Inquiry’s legal team will assist anyone asked to give evidence or produce documents. You will be taken through your evidence by Counsel to the Inquiry and will not be cross examined by anyone else. Most of those who give evidence to us will therefore not require legal representation. They will give evidence to the Inquiry and may have no further role to play."

I argue (as does the Inquiry) that witnesses believing they will be cross-examined while giving evidence could be deterred from coming forward. Sloppy inaccurate "journalism" like that of ITV/CTV could be extremely detrimental to the aims and objectives of the Inquiry in attempting to gather as much evidence from as many witnesses as possible.

This is not the first time ITV/CTV has mis-represented the proceedings of the Inquiry. It also misquoted a recent witness/transcript when it reported that a witness "accused" former Health Minister, and Whistleblower, Stuart Syvret of encouraging residents of homes to make "allegations" against staff at the homes. The witness/transcript actually said that Mr. Syvret encouraged residents to make "complaints." The connotation could be seen as residents being encouraged to tell lies. When the fact is that Mr. Syvret was doing the right thing as Health Minister by encouraging victims to voice their "complaints" of abuse and wasn't "accused" of doing anything.

It must be said that the Panel itself should take some responsibility for the sloppy "journalism" peddled by ITV/CTV who have a long history of this when it concerns the Child Abuse scandal and subsequent cover-up. If the Panel had done just the slightest of research into ITV/CTV's reporting (or not) of the Child Abuse scandal then I am confident it would not have granted it accreditation and banned it from the Inquiry's Media room instead of banning Bloggers. (Jersey's only independent media)

It is a waste of time me contacting ITV/CTV (copied in) directly because it has a complete disregard for the English Language as demonstrated HERE. Further has a complete disregard for the facts as demonstrated HERE and no matter how inaccurate its reporting is ITV/CTV always believes everything it broadcasts is "entirely accurate" as demonstrated in the above links and HERE.

Could I ask the Panel, in an attempt to undo any of the damage ITV/CTV might have caused the Inquiry by possibly deterring witnesses from coming forward to ask ITV/CTV to correct its latest misreporting by broadcasting an apology and correcting its misrepresentation of the facts? To make it clear that witnesses are NOT cross-examined?

Could I then please ask the Panel/Inquiry Team what sanctions are open to it should an "accredited" media outlet continue to misrepresent proceeding of the Hearings, and which, if any, of those sanctions will ITV/CTV incur?

Kind Regards.

VFC. (Unaccredited)"(END)

It is inconceivable to believe ITV/CTV was unaware that witnesses ARE NOT subject to cross examination. How is it, at all, possible to make that kind of "mistake?"

The Inquiry has been doing a good job of its expert questioning of witnesses without cross examining them. Information is coming to light from documents acquired by the Inquiry that shows it (Inquiry Team) is doing some serious homework/research in some areas.

Some good work is being done by the Inquiry (and some not so good) but when the "accredited" media continues to peddle inaccuracies/untruths it does the Inquiry no good and can prevent witnesses from coming forward.

We hope witnesses will still come forward to the Inquiry who can be contacted through its website HERE. It is not too late for Victims and Survivors to come forward.

Hopefully readers will be assured, by this Blog Posting, that witnesses ARE NOT cross examined and will have a flavour (by clicking on the links provided) of ITV/CTV's history of making up its own stories rather than reporting the facts.

As well as Victims and Survivors coming forward we'd like to reassure the likes of Bill Ogley, Ian Critch, Jon Richardson, Ian Le Marquand, Emma Martins, David Warcup, Mick Gradwell, Frank Walker and with the latest revelations coming from the Child Abuse Inquiry, and State Media PHILIP BAILHACHE. Not forgetting the notorious ANDREW LEWIS that you will not be cross examined and that your testimony is eagerly awaited.

We will keep readers posted as to what sanctions (if any) the serial offender ITV/CTV incur from the Inquiry for this latest, potentially dangerous, crock of (not even) Churnalism.

Tuesday, 4 August 2015

On November 10th 2008 Jersey’s Chief Police
Officer, Graham Power QPM, was (possibly illegally) suspended from duty by the
then Home Affairs Minister (above) discredited and disgraced ANDREW LEWIS.

He was suspended under very dubious circumstances where the
official version of events that led to his suspension did not, does not, stand
up to scrutiny so he had to be suspended again with an official line that (for
the Establishment) would look a little more credible to the gullible public.

The former Chief of Police, it should be mentioned, was (illegally?) suspended from duty during the biggest
Child Abuse Investigation (Operation Rectangle) this island has ever seen, or
is likely to see.

A matter of weeks after (illegally?) suspending the Chief
Officer, Andrew Lewis stepped away from political life and didn’t stand for
re-election until 2014 where he was re-elected as a Deputy in St Helier District 3/4.
The equally disgraced (former Magistrate) Ian Le Marquand was elected as
Senator and took over the role as Home Affairs Minister where he too dubiously
suspended Mr. Power with a story that was little more credible than that of
Andrew Lewis' but did not, does not, stand up to scrutiny either.

The now (or then) Home Affairs Minister Ian Le Marquand
claimed he was going to bring Chief Officer Power to a disciplinary hearing and
employed (at huge expense) an outside police force to gather the evidence
against Mr. Power. That UK Police Force was The Wiltshire Constabulary.

Wiltshire’s alleged “investigation” (Operation Haven 1)
subsequently went on to miss just about every deadline it was set, went way
over budget, and didn’t bring a single disciplinary charge against Mr. Power.
But that didn’t matter, its job was done. Wiltshire were able to give the Home
Affairs Minister some unproven, untested allegations against Mr. Power (the
prosecution case) to which Mr. Le Marquand duly (possibly illegally) published, with the help of the
State Media. Neither he, nor the local State Media, who are all in possession of Mr. Power's defence case, to this day, have published/broadcast a SINGLE WORD OF IT.

The day disgraced former Home Affairs Minister, Ian Le Marquand, published parts of the prosecution case against Mr. Power was a day that set a very DANGEROUS PRECEDENT. He has some very serious questions to answer including THOSE ASKED by Jersey's former Deputy Chief Police Officer and Senior Investigating Officer of the Child Abuse investigation (Operation Rectangle) Lenny Harper (above).

The Wiltshire Constabulary were very "helpful" to the Jersey Authorities by dragging out their investigation for so long that it would be impossible to test their evidence against Mr. Power's.

But what we didn't know (because Wiltshire kept it quiet) was that they look to have covered up claims of abuse made against former Prime Minister Ted Heath, who was a regular visitor to Jersey. The disgraced Wiltshire Constabulary, who stand accused of complicity in the Jersey Child Abuse cover-up, are, or have been, under investigation by the Independent Police Complaints Commission for a number of alleged "offences" due to its handling, (or lack of) abuse claims HERE and the Ted Heath claims HERE.

Brian Moore Senior Investigating Officer (Operation Haven 1) was then seconded, from Wilts, to become interim head of the UK Boarder Agency, with the apparent intention of taking up the full time post. He then stepped down IN DISGRACE from the UKBA.

Regular readers of this Blog will remember Best-Selling author and Journalist Leah McGrath Goodman was BANNED from the UK and Jersey after it became apparent she was investigating the child abuse, and POSSIBLE MURDER at Haut De la Garenne. She was detained at Heathrow Airport on 11 September 2011 where she was held in a cell for 12 hours, not allowed to contact ANYBODY in that time, it was eight hours before she was even asked a question. Terrorists/criminals do not get treated so appallingly, and who was at that time the Interim Head at the UKBA (a month before he stood down)? None other than Brian Moore former Chief of Wilts police and Senior Investigating Officer Operation Haven 1.

There is a large amount of media attention surrounding the allegations against former Prime Minister Edward Heath. As mentioned earlier in this posting he was a regular visitor to Jersey and guest of former President of Jersey Defence Committee (in charge of the police) Mike Wavell who ran, or owned, the Waters Edge Hotel at Bouley Bay where Heath's yacht would be moored up in the bay.

Indeed Heath was such a regular visitor to the island, in the final months of his life, we can exclusively reveal, that the States Of Jersey Police were involved with plans for his security and the arrangements which would have to be made should he die in Jersey.

The Heath story will sell "news"papers and make for attention grabbing headlines in the media. But for those who are interested in getting to the bottom of what is increasingly looking like a powerful UK (including Jersey) paedophile ring and how they are able to operate with impunity, then looking at the actions, and in-actions, of police forces like Wiltshire (and Jersey pre November 2008 and post November 2008).